ArticleActa psychiatrica Scandinavica2014
Measuring psychotic depression.
Article in Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Measuring treatment response in psychotic depression: the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS) takes both depressive and psychotic symptoms into account.Journal of affective disorders · 2014Trial
- Association between fasting blood glucose and psychotic symptoms in Chinese patients with first-episode drug-naïve major depressive disorder.BMC psychiatry · 2025Article
- Treatment of schizophrenia evaluated via the pharmacopsychometric triangle-An integrative approach with emphasis on well-being and functioning.Schizophrenia (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- A Machine-Learning-Algorithm-Based Prediction Model for Psychotic Symptoms in Patients with Depressive Disorder.Journal of personalized medicine · 2022Article
- Mental depression: Relation to different disease status, newer treatments and its association with COVID-19 pandemic (Review).Molecular medicine reports · 2021Review
- Validity and Reliability of the Self-administered Psycho-TherApy-SystemS (SELFPASS) Item Pool for the Daily Mood Tracking of Depressive Symptoms: Cross-sectional Web-Based Survey.JMIR mental health · 2021Article
- Article
- Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for moderate-severity major depression among the elderly: Data from the pride study.Journal of affective disorders · 2020Article
- Diagnostic Issues of Depressive Disorders from Kraepelinian Dualism to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition.Psychiatry investigation · 2019Article
- Clinical Validation of the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-6, and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-5: Results from the Clinical Research Center for Depression Study.Psychiatry investigation · 2017Article
- Vigour in active avoidance.Scientific reports · 2017Article
- Establishing the cut-off score for remission and severity-ranges on the Psychotic Depression Assessment Scale (PDAS).Journal of affective disorders · 2016Article
- Gender Differences in the Clinical Characteristics of Psychotic Depression: Results from the CRESCEND Study.Clinical psychopharmacology and neuroscience : the official scientific journal of the Korean College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2015Article
- Rating scales measuring the severity of psychotic depression.Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivePsychotic depression (PD) is a highly debilitating condition, which needs intensive monitoring. However, there is no established rating scale for evaluating the severity of PD. The aim of this analysis was to assess the psychometric properties of established depression rating scales and a number of new composite rating scales, covering both depressive and psychotic symptoms, in relation to PD.
methodThe psychometric properties of the rating scales were evaluated based on data from the Study of Pharmacotherapy of Psychotic Depression.
resultsA rating scale consisting of the 6-item Hamilton melancholia subscale (HAM-D6 ) plus five items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), named the HAMD-BPRS11 , displayed clinical validity (Spearman's correlation coefficient between HAMD-BPRS11 and Clinical Global Impression - Severity (CGI-S) scores = 0.79-0.84), responsiveness (Spearman's correlation coefficient between change in HAMD-BPRS11 and Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I) scores = -0.74--0.78) and unidimensionality (Loevinger's coefficient of homogeneity = 0.41) in the evaluation of PD. The HAM-D6 fulfilled the same criteria, whereas the full 17-item Hamilton Depression Scale failed to meet criteria for unidimensionality.
conclusionOur results suggest that the HAMD-BPRS11 is a more valid measure than pure depression scales for evaluating the severity of PD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.